I would suggest a small sharpening trick. I would call it two step sharpening.

I normally capture sharpen in Lightroom, using:

Amount

45

Radius

0.7

Detail

100

Masking

17

Noise reduction

20

These setting enhance fine detail optimally, according to my taste. What I discovered that the image can be improved a lot by doing an additional step of sharpening with a large radius and a small amount. I would use unsharp mask in photoshop and sharpen with radius = 3 and 25%.

The effect is quite subtle but quite obvious if applied in PS over a layer that is toggled.

As a side note, the detail slider operates so that at left position it supresses halos while in the right position it switches to deconvolution. I normally use radius 0.7 for sharp images, 1.0 for images that are less optimal and 1.3 to compensate for diffraction at f/16.

I absolutely agree. On the other hand the settings I use may be worth a try as a starting point.

Also, what I found and what I think may be more universal is that an additional step of low amplitude sharpening enhances the image. It is of course possible sharpen with a moderate amount at a large radius, but that will not improve fine detail.

I absolutely agree. On the other hand the settings I use may be worth a try as a starting point.

Also, what I found and what I think may be more universal is that an additional step of low amplitude sharpening enhances the image. It is of course possible sharpen with a moderate amount at a large radius, but that will not improve fine detail.

I also agree that the capture sharpening depends on the camera. I do completely different sharpening routines on my OM-D than I do on my 7D.

As for that large radius low percentage sharpening...I find that type of sharpening approach helps to cut haze and is a sort local contrast enhancement. It functions similarly to the use of a new layer with a highpass filter and an overlay blending mode.

The problem with the left method is that it doesn't push the MTF for low frequencies where the eye is most sensitive. The righthand method does not really improve that much on fine detail, but it was just a coarse demo.

Note: This test image was made with a 100/2.8 Macro at optimum aperture, sharper than usual.